JURIST Supported by the University of Pittsburgh
PAPER CHASE NEWSBURSTDigest RSS feedFull RSS feed
Serious law. Primary sources. Global perspective.


Saturday, January 06, 2007

Supreme Court to hear capital, labor, endangered species cases
Natalie Hrubos at 10:13 AM ET

[JURIST] The US Supreme Court [official website; JURIST news archive] Friday granted certiorari in seven cases [order list, PDF], including a capital case, an endangered species case, and two labor-related cases among others. In the Texas death row case Panetti v. Quarterman (06-6407) [docket], the Court will determine whether it is unconstitutional to execute an mentally ill individual who has a delusion about the actual reason he faces execution despite being factually aware of the reason. Scott Louis Panetti [advocacy website] knew he was being executed after killing his wife's parents, but he believed that it was actually because he was "preaching the gospel." The endangered species case stems from two consolidated cases, National Association of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife (06-340) [docket] and EPA v. Defenders of Wildlife (05-549) [docket; cert. petition, PDF], and allows the Court to examine whether the Endangered Species Act [text] permits the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) [official website] to transfer permitting authority for the discharge of pollutants to the state of Arizona.

In one labor-related case, BCI Coca-Cola Co. of Los Angeles v. EEOC (06-341) [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the Court will determine whether an employer may be held liable for a subordinate worker's alleged bias where the worker did not make the employment decision at issue. In a second labor-related case, Long Island Care at Home v. Coke (06-593) [docket; cert. petition, PDF], the Court will decide whether home care workers employed by outside agencies, not directly by families, should receive overtime pay. In other cases, the Court will examine federal law liability for lost or damaged freight, whether private prep schools can talk to prospective student athletes despite their voluntary agreement to obey a no-recruiting rule, and whether courts may consider inferences of innocence when deciding whether someone sued for federal securities violations has a guilty state of mind. SCOTUSblog has more.






Link |  | print | subscribe | RSS feeds | latest newscast | Facebook page

For more legal news check the Paper Chase Archive...


LATEST LEGAL NEWS

 US House votes for 20-week abortion ban
3:57 PM ET, June 19

 UK Supreme Court allows families of Iraq soldiers to sue government
2:28 PM ET, June 19

 AI: China mining companies contributing to Congo rights abuses
12:51 PM ET, June 19

 click for more...

Get JURIST legal news delivered daily to your e-mail!

LATEST FORUM

Is Egypt's Stance on the Blue Nile Dam Legally Justified?
DOMESTIC
Zeray Yihdego
University of Aberdeen School of Law

ABOUT

Paper Chase is JURIST's real-time legal news service, powered by a team of 30 law student reporters and editors led by law professor Bernard Hibbitts at the University of Pittsburgh School of Law. As an educational service, Paper Chase is dedicated to presenting important legal news and materials rapidly, objectively and intelligibly in an accessible, ad-free format.

CONTACT

Paper Chase welcomes comments, tips and URLs from readers. E-mail us at JURIST@jurist.org